Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What constitutes an air force?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What constitutes an air force?

    Despite my aversion to too much salivating at the mere mention of rounds per minute and payload capacity, so often an affliction of the boys with toys brigade, I would be interested to hear some opinions on the following point.

    Would it be reasonable to say that an air force today without fighter cover can really be called an air force, or would it be more accurate to call it an air support unit or some other similarly innocuous name?

    I am thinking of the New Zealand example where a few aged helicopters and a couple of Hercules have constituted the RNZAF for a number of years since the last fighter squadron was retired and not replaced.

    x
    Last edited by xris; 02 Apr 07,, 01:05.

  • #2
    Depends on your operational goals. For example a lot of nations maintain their Armed Forces solely for the purpose of internal security and ensuring territorial integrety. The best example I can think of is our Indonesian neighbours. In their case, with the exception of smaller, more mobile "stratgic forces" like KOSTRAD, the TNI is largely a COIN-specialised formation.
    If that's what you're going for, then the primary role for your Air is going to be Air Assault and short-range Airlift, CAS, surveillence and fire control, so a large body of expensive, long-range warplanes is superfluous, much like a fleet of long-range escort ships for your Naval Forces would be a waste of money.
    Similarly some nations only operate their Military Forces for the sake of self-defence. If power projection is not your goal, then short-range interceptors, AEW planes, ground-based AD and some supporting elements are all you're really going to need. This is pretty much the scenario the JASDF have found themselves in, although this is likely to begin changing slowly. In the case of the RNZAF, while I consider their abandonment of all air combat capabilities to be total folley (I would have gone with some Hawk-200 combat trainers and otherwise focused on Helos to support the Army and Navy), their current operational goals are based entirely within a region where there are only three nations with an Air Combat capability: the US Armed Forces, the ADF and France (and I don't think the AdlA has any warplanes in their Pacific provinces), so the expense of Air Superiority units is wasted on them.
    At least that's their perspective.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by -{SpoonmaN}- View Post
      In the case of the RNZAF, while I consider their abandonment of all air combat capabilities to be total folley (I would have gone with some Hawk-200 combat trainers
      Agreed
      Originally posted by -{SpoonmaN}- View Post
      and otherwise focused on Helos to support the Army and Navy),
      New NH90's
      Originally posted by -{SpoonmaN}- View Post
      their current operational goals are based entirely within a region where there are only three nations with an Air Combat capability: the US Armed Forces, the ADF and France (and I don't think the AdlA has any warplanes in their Pacific provinces), so the expense of Air Superiority units is wasted on them.
      At least that's their perspective.
      Our Army is based on being an Australian auxillary and UN peacekeeping roles (excluding the SAS), and our navy is being aimed at South Pacific patrol with a token international presence with the two toothless ANZAC frigates.
      In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

      Leibniz

      Comment


      • #4
        Thank you spoonman and parihaka for that.

        On the face of it it appears that the loss of trained fighter pilots and the ability to train new entrants is perhaps the greatest loss to the RNZAF, although the question of what will it ever be used for is a difficult one to answer, unless the answer is 'nothing'.

        The run down of the RNZN to little more than a coastal and fisheries policing role is perhaps much more difficult to justify. It is hard to understand how a country such as NZ in the middle of the South Pacific should have a navy of barely ocean going capability.

        At this point I think it preferable for me to post a flag by my name but heaven only knows how I do it. I know, it's dead easy, so what do I do?

        x
        Last edited by xris; 02 Apr 07,, 09:08. Reason: typos

        Comment


        • #5
          Well, what external threat is there for New Zealand? Who can possibly mount an airborne or amphibious assault against NZ? Or even send a blue water navy to blockade or disrupt New Zealand's trade?

          The only nation on earth with the ability to assault New Zealand with a full scale invasion is the US, and that's not gonna happen any time soon. Even I can tell you that.

          Only a few navies can even reach New Zealand. The Royal Navy, Australian Navy which is right next door, the US navy of course, the French Navy, and probably the Japanese.

          How likely are these navies to attack New Zealand? Probably close to zero. Although I wouldn't trust them ozzies, with their little beady eyes and shifty personalities and funny accent...
          "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by xris View Post
            At this point I think it preferable for me to post a flag by my name but heaven only knows how I do it. I know, it's dead easy, so what do I do?

            x
            Sign in. Then go to "User CP" on the top of this page, or any page. Click on "Edit Profile" on the left hand column. Near the bottom of the page is a section called "Home Country" with a drop down menu. The list is quite extensive. It's interesting to see that US, Canada, and (surprisingly) Vietnam are on top of the list, not filed alphabetically.
            "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by gunnut View Post
              Well, what external threat is there for New Zealand? Who can possibly mount an airborne or amphibious assault against NZ? Or even send a blue water navy to blockade or disrupt New Zealand's trade?
              An argument difficult to counter. Taken to its logical extreme NZ does not really need any defence force, except perhaps a squadron for an extremely unlikey internal civil emergency and a couple,coastal patrol ships to police illegal fishing, and a couple of helicopters to move people around quickly.

              Naturally there is more to be taken into consideration here, not least of which is being seen to be pulling ones weight with friends and self promotion in the region.

              We could also make a strong case though for applying the same logic to many other states. What possible risk of invasion against the UK now exists?

              What vital trade routes need protecting and from what?

              By getting involved in so many overseas policing/counter-insurgency and anti-terrorist roles the UK is simply inviting retaliation at home from a lunatic fringe that was and always will be there, but is now agitated and provoked into taking abominal acts of terrorism. Look at the way the IRA was handled and compare it to the what al-quada is handled. what differences can be seen?

              One obvious one perhaps is that the USA subtley supported the cause of a united Ireland and was therefore indirectly supporting the terrorist actions of the IRA.

              In case it needs to be said, which I don't think it does, I am not supporting the actions of al-quada or any other terrorist group. I am merely trying to suggest that the methods used to combat the problem is having counterproductive effects. To return to the Irish/IRA issue. Was that problem solved by military force? No. Was it solved by politics? Yes.

              If you do not change what is in people's minds then you do not really solve the problem.

              x

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by xris View Post
                To return to the Irish/IRA issue. Was that problem solved by military force? No. Was it solved by politics? Yes.

                If you do not change what is in people's minds then you do not really solve the problem.

                x
                Here's a question for you: do you truly believe IRA terrorism is the same as islamic terrorism?

                What makes up the Irish people? How are they like? What is their culture like?

                What makes up the muslims? How are they like? What is their culture like?

                What were the IRA targeting through all the years fighting against the Brits?

                What do the islamists target today?

                Can you really tell me that you can sit down and talk reason with the islamists like how you do that with the Irish?

                We all like to say terrorism is terrorism, stealing is stealing, bank robbery is bank robbery, doesn't matter how big or small. But in reality, we do seperate them. Taking a pen from the office is stealing. Taking a car is stealing. But they are very different.

                Did the IRA have daily bombings of markets and cafes back in the day? Did they fly jets into a big building full of civilians? Did they kill someone making a critical documentary about their religion? Did they burn embassies when someone draws a comic about their prophet? What was their aim? Did they want to be left alone or push their religion and law throughout the world?

                Some very fundamental difference between islam and all other religions in the world, at least in the way it's practiced. I have never read the koran so I can't comment. But its followers just don't bring a warm and fuzzy feeling to the table.
                "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                  Here's a question for you: do you truly believe IRA terrorism is the same as islamic terrorism?
                  Not even close , it was specific, against the British Government

                  What makes up the Irish people? How are they like? What is their culture like?
                  Nothing lke the muslims

                  What makes up the muslims? How are they like? What is their culture like?
                  Nothing like the Irish , they have no sense of humour


                  What were the IRA targeting through all the years fighting against the Brits?
                  Infrastructer, but there were many uncalled for casualties

                  What do the islamists target today?
                  Anything western and non muslim

                  Can you really tell me that you can sit down and talk reason with the islamists like how you do that with the Irish?
                  Not a chance

                  We all like to say terrorism is terrorism, stealing is stealing, bank robbery is bank robbery, doesn't matter how big or small. But in reality, we do seperate them. Taking a pen from the office is stealing. Taking a car is stealing. But they are very different.
                  But the taking of life is the same

                  Did the IRA have daily bombings of markets and cafes back in the day?
                  Yes and Pubs, financial institutions and even a shool

                  Did they fly jets into a big building full of civilians?
                  No

                  Did they kill someone making a critical documentary about their religion
                  ?

                  Yes, they "assasinated" reporters, and lets not forget Lord Mountbatten

                  Did they burn embassies when someone draws a comic about their prophet
                  No as I said the Irish do have a sense of humour

                  What was their aim?
                  A united Ireland

                  Did they want to be left alone or push their religion and law throughout the world?
                  Yes they wanted to be left alone in a united Ireland, the Pope pushes there religion for them.


                  Some very fundamental difference between islam and all other religions in the world, at least in the way it's practiced. I have never read the koran so I can't comment. But its followers just don't bring a warm and fuzzy feeling to the table.
                  I agree
                  sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

                  Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    PS.... What this has to do with "Air Forces" is beyond me though
                    sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

                    Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by T_igger_cs_30 View Post
                      PS.... What this has to do with "Air Forces" is beyond me though
                      What can I say? I'm an expert at hijacking threads.
                      "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Parihaka's wish list for the NZ defence forces.

                        Army.
                        They are well equiped and trained but understaffed for the multiplicity of roles they are now required to undertake, so another battalion.
                        Revamp the territorials, they are currently underfunded and under-advertised.

                        Air Force.
                        2 squadrons Hawk-200 combat trainers, another four NH90's as well.

                        Navy.
                        As is, but effectively armed. The new ice strengthened 'inshore' patrol craft are excellent, as is the new MRV. One extra Frigate would be nice.

                        The Army is designed to work alongside larger forces in a large conflict, and does very well in this role, and are extremely well regarded. All that is required is that the territorials are revamped so if needed we can step up with more forces. In WWII it took us a year to get a poorly trained division in the field, 2 1/2 years for another division. We need to be much faster than this.
                        In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                        Leibniz

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Pari do you guys still have a battalion of Infantry based in Singapore?
                          sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

                          Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by T_igger_cs_30 View Post
                            Pari do you guys still have a battalion of Infantry based in Singapore?
                            No.
                            We nominally have two battalions based at home, but they are understaffed. Current deployments are Afghanistan, Timor Leste and the Solomons, plus the various UN tokens of 1 - 10 personnel for each.
                            Two embarrassing things for the government recently.
                            The latest Fiji coup. If force had been needed to get any of our citizens out, there wasn't a damn thing we could do about it.
                            A psycho in a light plane threatening to crash it into the Sky Tower in Auckland. He circled for more than an hour and there wasn't a damn thing the Government could do about it.
                            In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                            Leibniz

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                              A psycho in a light plane threatening to crash it into the Sky Tower in Auckland. He circled for more than an hour and there wasn't a damn thing the Government could do about it.
                              How about sending some police armed with automatic rifles to the building?

                              Or even 2 guys with automatic rifles in a police helo...

                              Did this incident make some lawmakers rethink the "no airforce" doctrine?
                              "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X